Teitzel & Olman & Anor (No.2)

In this matter before Judge Boymal, the applicant mother sought final parenting and property orders against the first respondent father and the second respondent. The proceedings were contested, with the first respondent father having filed an application in the case. The court was required to determine whether to grant the applicant mother and the Independent Children’s Lawyer leave to proceed on an undefended basis, given the first respondent father's failure to participate in the trial.

The court's reasoning focused on the first respondent father's non-participation in the proceedings. The court granted leave to proceed on an undefended basis, effectively dismissing the first respondent father's application in the case. This decision paved the way for the court to make final parenting and property orders.

The court made extensive final orders, including granting the applicant mother sole parental responsibility for the children, with the children to live with her. The first respondent father was granted supervised time with the children, with the costs of supervision to be borne by him. The court also made orders regarding communication between the children and the first respondent father, and the disclosure of personal information. Significant property orders were made, including the disbursement of monies held in controlled and protected accounts, and the division of various assets and liabilities between the parties. The court also made orders restraining the removal of the children from the Commonwealth of Australia and directed the Australian Federal Police to place the children's names on the Airport Watch List. Finally, the court made orders regarding the payment of costs and provided a mechanism for the respondents to seek leave to set aside the orders within 21 days of service.